Friday, March 13, 2009

The Thursday of Championship Week is always exciting, as all of the big conferences get their tournaments started. This one was no different. The biggest shocker of the day was that three No. 1 seeds went down. The upsets started when Pitt got beat up by West Virginia, and that was followed by Oklahoma getting knocked off by Oklahoma State in a last-second thriller. To top it all off was the 6OT epic battle/game of the year between UConn and Syracuse. The Huskies had plenty of opportunities in just about every OT period to put the game away, but they were unable to do so. It eventually became a game of attrition and by the sixth overtime, too many UConn big men had fouled out and they just went cold from the field. Syracuse continues to have the Huskies' number in the Big East tourney the past few years.

By the end of the night, Pitt was the only team that played that was able to hold onto their 1 seed. Oklahoma dropped down to the third 2 seed and really has no chance to climb back up. UConn, on the other hand, may be able to get back on the 1 line should Louisville lose to Villanova or Michigan State go down before the Big Ten final. Duke is also in the running for a one seed if they can make a run to the final of the ACC tourney, and even Wake Forest could get itself in the mix if it won the ACC tourney. Despite what some commentators may believe, we still think that Memphis has no shot at a 1 seed.

Now onto the all important bubble talk. The bigget winners of the day were the Big Ten bubble bunch, San Diego State, and Oklahoma State. The biggest losers were Providence, Arizona, and New Mexico. Here's another conference-by-conference breakdown:

In the A-10...Rhode Island completely knocked themselves out of at-large consideration with their loss to Duquesne. Meanwhile, Dayton is now a lock for the tourney and Temple is back in the mix. The Owls' slim tourney were revived with URI going down, but they are still on life support. If the Owls can take out Xavier on Friday they would be back in the mix for an at-large, but they would still need a lot of help and only a close loss to Dayton in the final would give them any hope. They have some nice OOC wins and a solid RPI, but simply have too many bad losses.

In the ACC...Maryland and Virginia Tech moved on to keep their tourney hopes alive, while BC locked up their bid. Now both the Terps and the Hokies have a chance to pick up another marquee win and play their way into the field. We wouldn't go so far as saying that both would be a lock with a win on Friday, but they would be in good shape and would likely find themselves in the tourney.

In the Big XII...One of the big winners of the day was Oklahoma State. Their win over Oklahoma erases any doubt concerning their tourney chances and also moved them up to a 8 seed. Kansas State is officially done after they went down in a close battle with Texas. Kansas became the first conference one seed to go down out of the major conferences and opened up the possibility of Baylor running the table to steal a bid.

In the Big East...The best games of the day were played at Madison Square Garden. Early in the day, Villanova dropped Marquette on a last second lay-up, and more importantly for those on the the bubble, Providence get blown out by Louisville. The Friars will remain in the mix until Selection Sunday because of their above-.500 conference record and wins over Syracuse and Pitt, but we can't see anyway that they climb back into the field. Their OOC resume contains no wins over any tourney teams (the loss to St. Mary's really hurts right now) and they continue to get blown out by Big East tourney teams away from their home court.

In the Big Ten...We never like the admit we were wrong, but it looks like we have no choice in this one. We finally were forced to cave and put eight Big Ten teams in the field. Minnesota, Michigan, and Penn State all won easily to move onto the Big Ten quarters and all eight teams left in the Big Ten field look like they will be dancing. If we had to pick one team that would miss out on the dance at this point we would have to say Penn State. Their RPI is 25-30 points lower than the rest of the bubble teams and if they were to get blown out by Purdue it would not be unthinkable for the Nittany Lions to be left out.

In the Pac-10...Arizona suffered yet another loss, making it five out of six losses to end the year. This team has a ton of talent, but they really just can't seem to make that translate into wins on the court. They will now have a long wait till Sunday and their streak of 24 straight tourney appearances is in serious trouble. They have plenty of good wins on their resume, but none of them were a true road game. The one point loss that the Wildcats suffered at Texas A&M back in December must really hurt UofA fans. They let a big lead slip away late in that one and if they could of just hung on they would be in ahead of the Aggies now. They are currently our last team out so they will remain in the mix throughout the weekend and will be the focus of plenty of debate. Will their five Top 50 wins be enough to earn them a bid, or will their poor finish keep them out? USC was able to keep their slim tourney hopes alive by knocking off Cal. They will need a win over UCLA on Friday to really recieve any serious consideration.

In the MWC...Bubble teams throughout the land couldn't be happier with the way things went in the MWC today. We have been saying all season that the conference has no chance for four bids and it looks like we'll at least get that one correct. SDSU won yet again at UNLV to keep their tourney hopes alive, and in the process, destroy UNLV's chances. In the night cap, New Mexico was stunned by Wyoming. The Lobos can start preparing for the NIT since their at-large hopes are over. They may have finished in a three-way tie for first and have won 8 of their last 10, but they also have a 65 RPI, a disgusting OOC resume, and have no good road wins. Their loss also takes some luster off of Creighton's resume. The Aztecs, on the other hand, may have been the biggest winners of the day. Not only did they pick up another road win against UNLV, which helped pump their RPI up seven spots, but they are also the clear cut third choice out of the MWC. A win over BYU in the semis would be a good idea, though. They have only one win over a team in our current bracket, which is also their only top 50 win. If they can't get by BYU then their resume will not stack up very favorably when compared with fellow bubble teams that they lost to - Arizona and St. Mary's.

In the SEC...There were really no surprises in Tampa yesterday. Florida beat Arkansas to set up an elimination game with Auburn. A win for Florida may be enough to get them a bid, and if they can get to the finals they would be a lock. Auburn, on the other hand, will need to beat Florida and Tiger fans should actually hope Tennessee avoids another upset against Alabama. Auburn needs all the good wins it can get and they will need to beat Florida and Tennessee to really like their at-large chances heading into the SEC championship. South Carolina faces a must-win against a Mississippi State team that they recently lost to. The Gamecocks also will need a run to the final to lock down a bid. Bubble teams throughout the land will have a close eye on the SEC, since right now the third and fourth best teams are looking like teams on either the Last Four In or Last Four Out lines come Sunday.

We will post one more bracket on Friday night before going into lockdown to produce our final bracket, which will be released Sunday afternoon. Enjoy the rest of Championship Week...

Bracket BreakdownIn This BracketMinnesota, St. Mary's, San Diego State

How high would Dayton climb if they win the A-10? I assume beating Xavier would be more beneficial than beating Temple in the finals, so how high would either outcome bump them?

I know these games don't happen in a vacuum, so it'd only be your best guess.

And also, why is Xavier seeded so much higher than Dayton?

Most people have Xavier around a 4 seed and Dayton a 9, despite both teams having basically identical overall records, conference records, records in their last 12, overall rpi, records vs the rpi top 50 and records vs the rpi top 100. They both also clobbered the other on their home court (although only one of them was on national tv).

Their sos are ~50 for Xavier and ~95 for Dayton. Xavier has wins against Memphis, Missouri and LSU (if you count LSU as a "good" win). Dayton has a win over a pre-injuried Marquette.

I agree that as of now, Xavier should absolutely have the better seed (better sos, a better ooc win), but by 5?

How does the Big Ten go from a 4 bid league to an 8 bid leauge by only beating big ten teams, while the ACC goes from an 8 bid leage to a six bid leauge by only losing to ACC teams? This happens EVERY SINGLE YEAR. I think the ACC should throw the Big Ten/ACC Annual Beat Down next year to get more NCAA bids.

Xavier is seeded five lines higher than Dayton for two main reasons - they have three good OOC wins to Dayton's one, and they are the projected winner of the A-10 tournament. If Dayton beats Xavier and wins the A-10 tourney, they will likely be a 7 seed and Xavier a 5.

In the last couple of weeks, there have been a lot of annoyed ACC fans using the result of the ACC/Big Ten Challenge as an argument against the Big Ten getting eight bids and the ACC getting 6-7 bids. These fans are forgetting (or ignoring), however, the fact that the ACC didn't exactly dominate the challenge (they won 6-5) and that the challenge took place over three months ago. A lot has changed over the last three months, and while head-to-head match-ups are important, head-to-head results from early December don't mean that one league deserves more bids than the other in March.

The Big Ten is not getting eight bids because it is a "better" league than the ACC (or the Big East). They are getting eight bids because a perfect storm of things happened and because their top-level teams lost a lot of games to the teams in the middle of the league. That wasn't the case as much in the ACC or the Big East.

Don't give us this perfect storm logic. Also, if you honestly think that Michigan St. deserves a 1 seed more than UConn based on losing a 6 OT thriller than that is just flat out not using common sense.

Compare the 2 teams and the 2 resumes and they aren't even close. I really hope the committe does not use this stupid logic of teams moving up and down based one 1 freakin' game.

Let's take a look at Michigan St.'s resume first. Right now they're 25-5 and they finished 13-3 in the Big Ten and let's assume they win the Big Ten tournament and finish 28-5 (which is not a lock). They got absolutely blown out against MD and UNC in OOC play. Their 2 big OOC wins came against the Big 12 against Kansas and Texas. While those are good wins, they are not great. In conference they lost at home to Northwestern and PSU, absolutely awful. Then they get blown out at Purdue and almost lose to freakin' Indiana late in the season.

Now let's move onto UConn, they have a record of 27-4, 15-3 in the Big East and lose in a 6 OT thriller in the Big East tournament against a possible 4 seed, they weren't blown out or anything. Their OOC resume was not great, but they didn't lose a game. They crushed Wisonsin and Miami and won at Gonzaga. In conference they don't lose a game on the road until the last game at Pitt. They lose twice to Pitt who is a #1 seed and they lose at home to Georgetown back in Dec where we all can admit Gtown was a lot better in Dec than they are now.

In my opinion, there is no doubt UConn is a better team, have a better resume, beat better teams and lose to A LOT better teams. You can not lose at home to Northwestern and Penn St. get crushed by MD on a neutral court and look like you don't even belong on the same court as UNC in Detroit and still be a #1 seed.

Why do you put so much stock in one game in these brackets. I thought your MO was that you "predict" what is going to happen, yet you change your bracket daily. The reality is you have no clue and put a bracket out there a few hours before the committee does and act like you have this great track record. Let's take a look at one of your brackets from February and see how "accurate" it is, since you "predict" the end of the season.

If nobody thinks it's a better league than it shouldn't be getting more bids. I'm not saying your prediction is wrong, it isn't. I am saying the system is totally &^(^ed. My theory is that when you are a top 50 team and you go 1-1 in a week your stock drops while a 50-100 team that goes 1-1 has a stock that rises. The Big Ten gets beat down every year in October-December. The ACC had a combined 15 losses (spread out through 12 teams) when conference play began. So when the ACC is going 1-1 their stock is falling while the Big Ten is doing the same thing and their stock is rising. The whole system is broke. And to all the Big Ten backers, hang a respectable number of banners and get to a respectable number of final fours and come talk to me.

One more rant, but I have to say it, because it is driving anyone but Big Ten fans nuts.

This conference has come up with the perfect formula in both football and basketball the last 5 years or so.

It's really very simple, mediocrity trumps everything. Look at college football, Ohio St. was in the national championship 2 years in a row and got absolutely blown out, and PSU almost made it to the championship game last year if they hadn't blown it against Iowa but get dominated by USC in the Rose Bowl (which has become tradition every year, USC just kills a non-worthy Big Ten opponent). This all happens because these teams refuse to play anybody OOC and they just beat up on the god awful Big Ten (who went 1-6 in bowl games last year) and the voters just ignore the fact that strength of schedule counts for anything.

Now for college basketball, again the key word is mediocrity. A perfect example is Penn St. Their OOC resume is flat out embarassing, beat absolutely nobody and lose to A-10 teams, yet they go 10-8 in conference play beat Indiana for a 3rd time this season and they are now a "lock". They get credit for beating the "top" teams in the conference 4 times this year. OK, while they are good wins, they are not great wins. Those 3 "top" teams were a combined 0-4 against the ACC this year. Michigan St. was blown out by MD on a neutral court and was ANNILIATED against UNC in Detroit. Purdue was spanked on it's home floor against Duke and Illinois lost at home against Clemson, but somehow when Penn St. beats them, it becomes a HUGE win. How?

The bottom line is this conference has fooled everyone in sports for years, they are loaded with mediocre talent and look a lot better than what they truly are in conference play because they're playing against other mediocre talent and at some point the NCAA has to wake up and realize that winning the Big Ten in football really doesn't mean much and that going 9-9 in conference should never get you a birth in the tournament.

Billy - You make some very valid points about UConn, the Big Ten, and the ACC. We aren't saying we like the "reward mediocrity system," but that's the way things are. It's our job to predict who we think the committee will put in the tournament, and if we think they are going to reward mediocrity, we have to reward it too.

B101, you guys are doing your job well. "We" only rant here becuase the NCAA doesn't have a board for us to rant on. Well that and there are a ton of Big Ten fans on this board who need to realize they can get all the bids in the world and they still won't have any teams in the final four. Shoot put all 11 teams in, give them a quarter of the entire bracket and they still won't get more than 1 team to the elite 8 which is a statistical miracle of suckiness.

I think the Big Ten has 8 of the 45 best teams in the country. I think MSU is in the top 5, Ilinois and Putrdue are in the the 15-25 range, and the other bubble teams are all in the 30-45 range. Does anybody disagree with that? If you don't disagree with that, how can you argue the Big Ten should get fewer teams in the tournament?

Why does the fact that the ACC and Big East are stronger at the top make make you think they are also stronger in the lower middle? They aren't!

For thew ACC lovers, please remember that your 3 seed (Duke) lost to the B10s 7seed (Michigan) and your 4 (Fla St) seed lost to the B10s 9 seed (Northwestern). So there are bad losses both ways.

To those hating on Michigan State, If Michigan State loses early in their tournament, nobody will be arguing for them to get a number one. But if you need a lens to understand MSU's season, remember that MSU is 12-0 with their current, healthy lineup. Goran Suton is the Big Ten's top rebounder. He missed the Maryland and UNC games with knee injuries. Raymar Morgan was a preseason Wooden Award candidate. He had mono during the the Northwestern, Penn St, and Purdue losses. The committee takes these factors into consideration. When you consider how UConn looked before and after the injury to Jerome Dyson, I think it's reasonable to think MSU looks better right now.

At March to Detroit, we've got an almost identical account of who's in and out at this point. The only difference is that we have Arizona instead of South Carolina.

I'm having a very hard time seeing the argument for South Carolina. They have a so-so RPI of 50, and they are 1-5 against the top 50, with the only win against fellow Bubble team Florida (which neither of us includes in our Tourney field).

I've seen other sites include them in the field too, so I'm wondering if we're just missing something. What's the argument here? Is it a couple of decent road wins? It can't be late season form, as they lost 3 of their last 6 regular season games (1 to Vanderbilt, 1 to MSU). Is it just an assumption that the Committee will go out of its way to include more than two SEC teams? But even if it's that, doesn't Florida have a marginally better resume?

When you compare to an Arizona team that has struggled a bit late, but has 5 top 50 wins (Kansas, Gonzaga, UCLA, Washington, USC), and has had a much tougher schedule, it looks pretty favorable for the Wildcats.

Lee - The problem with your argument is that there is no clear metric for rating one conference "better" than another. Some people base it on depth and parity, some on top-heavyness, some on overall averages, etc. And to the extent that we could agree on a single metric for evaluating a conference as a whole, it still strictly proportional to the number of individual teams that should receive at-large bids.

If it were, you'd be using Pomeroy's ratings to argue that the PAC-10 deserves more bids than the Big East. Are you making that claim?

My favorite thing is that all these ACC backers use the fact that Michigan State has lost to Maryland and got killed by North Carolina, and Purdue got manhandled by Duke. You must have selective memories though, because you idiotic ACC backers only provide one side of the argument. Out of respect for the Big Ten, I'll provide the other: Are you going to forget about Michigan beating Duke? Are you going to forget about Michigan beating UCLA? Are you going to forget about Michigan coming within 2 minutes of beating UCONN at Storrs? How did the 9th best team in the Big Ten (Northwestern) do against the #4 team in the ACC (Florida St.)? Let me field that one. THEY MANHANDLED THEM. What about Illinois winning by 16 at Missouri, the new favorite to win the Big 12 with OK and Kansas out? Oh and I'm sorry, who did Minnesota beat? Oh yea, Louisville, the #1 SEED in the Big East. The Big Ten was TWO points away from turning that 6-5 around in their favor and winning the ACC/Big Ten Challenge for the first time ever. It's also funny how the ACC seems to coincidentally avoid sending one of its bad teams to play a Big Ten team since they have 12 teams to the 11 in the Big Ten. Who was it this year? N.C. State, go figure, the 3rd worst team in the conference. So before you start freaking out about the Big Ten not getting quality out of conference wins, do some factchecking.

South Carolina obviously needs to beat Mississippi State today to have any chance at an at-large and will also likely need a semifinal win as well. We think a trip to the final for a team which tied for the SEC East title will be enough. Anything less and they are likely out. It will be interesting to see how the SEC tourney plays out especially if we see a final between LSU and Tennessee. Is it really possible that only 2 SEC teams go dancing this year?!

Very few people question that the ACC is a stronger tournament than the Big Ten. Certainly, the top teams in the ACC are vastly superior to the top teams in the Big Ten. The issue is whether the mid-level teams in the Big Ten (Michigan, Penn State, Minnesota) are better than the mid-level teams (Maryland, Miami, Virginia Tech) in the ACC. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong that the ACC deserves more bids and the Big Ten deserves less, but keep your focus as to why the bubble teams in the ACC deserve a bid and the bubble teams in the Big Ten don't.

And the Pomeroy ratings are “purely predictive”. Kenpom explicitly says that the ratings should NOT to be used to rank how good a team is:http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/ratings_explanation

Finally, while Big Ten football may indeed be mediocre, I see no evidence that Big Ten football teams schedule weaker OOC than other conferences. But that's an argument for a different website :)....

Better conferences don't necessarily deserve more bids. After all, bids are given to teams. Look at Pomeroy's ratings for example. Assume you just took his top 48 teams as the 1-12 seeds in the tournament (should be a good approximation as 13-16 are usually auto-bids from small conference). That would mean 7 Big Ten teams (all the ones in question except Penn State) would be taken, but only 6 ACC teams (Miami would be in, and BC would be out). Yet, he also has the ACC as the #1 conference, and the Big Ten #5. That's possible because the ACC has the stronger top, but the Big Ten has the stronger middle and sub-middle.

This is coming from someone who is by no means a Big 10 guy, but for you ACC guys: suck it up. As long as UNC, Duke, FSU, Wake, and Clemson are in, that's what matters. B.C. will get in and they suck losing to Harvard, at home. If Maryland and Miami could beat UVA and/or Ga Tech, they'd be in a lot better shape. If Va Tech would have beaten anybody out of conference, they'd be okay.

Now, the same thing can be said for Penn St in my mind. I don't really think the Big 10 is anywhere near a top conference this year, but they do have 1 top 10 team and 7 teams that are between 20th and 50th in the country. Yes, I do believe the 5th best ACC team (Clemson) would have come in 2nd in the Big 10 and the 6th/7th best Big East team (Syr/W Virgina) would have come in 2nd in the Big 10. But that's beside the point. I think teams 2-8 in the Big 10 are better than the Providences and B.C.'s of the world.

First of all, Ken Pomeroy's rankings openly admit that margin of victory is the only thing that matters. So apparently dropping 100 on everybody until you eventually run into a team you can't get away with choosing not to play defense against is all that matters in college basketball. His "system" predicted that Michigan would end the season on a 5 game losing streak, and that clearly did not happen.

Second, winning is the criteria for making the tournament, not recruiting McDonalds All Americans. If you want to give bids based on McDonalds All Americans than by all means, give bids to Rutgers, Nevada, Virginia, and Georgia Tech.

Third, if you're going to use the "ACC won the Big Ten/ACC challenge" argument, do it in a year the ACC wins 9-2 rather than this year where it was 6-5, and only because Illinois didn't get a shot off vs. Clemson when they had the ball with 30 seconds left in a game they led for 39 minutes. Not to mention that NC State didn't play.

Fourth, since WHEN did the Big Ten stop getting teams into the final four? MSU has 4 appearances, Indiana made it, Wisconsin made it, OSU made it, Illinois made it.

The fact of the matter is, the ACC and Big East are top heavy this year, your bubble teams finished with losing records in conference. And let's face it, you don't get a losing conference record without suffering bad losses. VT lost to Georgia and UVa, Maryland lost to UVa and Morgan State, and I couldn't have been the only guy who thought Miami wouldn't get to 8-8 when their last 3 games were NC St, UVa, and Ga Tech.

Btw, I liked how you made that backhanded comment implying that Big XII teams aren't quality wins.

But the point is, the Big Ten bubble teams didn't choke while the ACC and Big East bubble teams found it very tough to play basketball with their hands around their neck.

Maryland's an interesting case. Got the screwjob by having to play Duke and UNC twice. 2 incredible wins (Mich St and UNC) and also beat Michigan. After that there's not much there though. Lost at home to Morgan St. Lost an absolutely have to win game @UVA. I actually think they're a better team than B.C. They're definitely one of the best 65 teams, but the question is if the committee thinks their actual performance indicates so.

Let's talk Syracuse. RPI is up to #13 now. Playing high RPI West Virginia tonight, so it will not drop much. 13-7 in the Big East now with 3 top wins on the season all on the road/neutral court (UConn, Memphis, and Kansas). Lunardi still has them as a 6 seed today. I think a protected seed should be locked in now (4 or above). If they win tonight against W Virginia, I almost think they're a 3. And if they do the unthinkable and beat Louisville tomorrow night....probably still a 3, maybe slight chance at a 2. What does B101 think?

Billy, if you are going to rant at least use correct info. All time, the ACC has 10 NCAA championships and 42 Final Four appearances. The Big Ten has 10 NCAA championships and 40 Final Four appearances. Just because the ACC is more top heavy, doesn't mean it is a better conference.

The Orange are now a lock on the 4 line and a BET championship guarantees them a 3. If they can get by WVU tonight they will certainly be in the mix for the last 3 as well and it would really depend on how well the teams ahead of them do in their conference tournies.

Hey Matt - I assume you are saying that Robert Morris should be a 16 instead of a 15. When it comes down to seeding the 14-16 lines, the RPI of each team is usually a pretty good indicator of where thy end up. Right now, Robert Morris has an RPI of 110, which is 20 points higher than anyone on the 16 line.

Anyone see Lunardi's latest? He still has New Mexico in. What's with his love for the MWC? And I'm an MWC guy? I think three teams is resonable, but four after what New Mexico and UNLV did yesterday is not possible. Unless Wyoming wins the conference tourney, and then they probably steal SDSU's bid.

Lunardi has been lost when it comes to the MWC all year. He had five (five!!) MWC teams in one day last week, and he's had four in for most of the season. There is almost a zero perent chance that New Mexico makes the field after their loss to Wyoming. The only way the MWC gets four bids now (and it's about a one percent chance) is if Wyoming wins the MWCT. Even then, they Cowboys would probably get SDSU's bid and make the MWC a three-bid league.

If we're going to get angry because a team that finishes sub-500 in its conference and has fewer than 20 wins and has an RPI above 60 (Maryland) doesn't get into the tournament then I really don't know what to say. That is not a tournament team. Yes the ACC is good, but it doesn't mean Maryland is good by association. Look at the teams, not the conference.

After the mention of Syracuse being a 6 seed we took a look at Lunardi's bracket. It's almost as if he didn't factor in last night's late games to his latest bracket. He still has New Mexico in when they have absolutely no chance of getting a bid and UNLV on the last four out line. He'll come around on New Mexico in the next 2 days and they will end up no where near the field in his final bracket.

I think we need a new term to think of those who want to rip on the Big Ten...How 'bout BigElevenitis: The fear of admitting that members of the Big Ten actually do what they need to do, whilst denying to admit that their own teams didn't do what they needed to do.

B101 said it right, shut up big ten haters, just because none of your teams can handle business doesnt mean you gotta be all pist off about it. Michigan deserves a bid and Minnesota deserves a bid. Just accept the fact that the Big 10 is a good conference, not an elite conference, but I would take Northwestern the 9th best team in the B10 against any other 9th best team in the ACC or Big East.

BIG 10 IS GETTING 8 OR AT LEAST 7, ACCEPT IT AND MOVE ON. JUST BECAUSE YOUR TEAMS COLLAPSED COME BUBBLE TIME WHEN MICHIGAN MINNY AND PSU WERE TAKIN CARE OF THEIR BUSINESS.

I'm with 12:56 here, teams in the Big Ten did what they needed to do to get, they will get at least 7, if not 8 in the field. Oh and VPI can lobby for some home games in the NIT, though they may sneak in the back door.

Wisconsin beat VT, please VT fans shut up!! You guys could never win a single close game, proving today no matter how much Seth Greenberg cries YOU ARE N.I.T. bound again!!! VT coulda beat Duke, UNC twice but the fact is they didnt. HAVE FUN IN THE N.I.T.

Lee...I'm more sympathetic to your side of the argument, but your comment about Virgina Tech joining the Big 10 is off base. Va Tech has losses to Seton Hall, Georgia, and Virginia this year. Those are bottom of the barrel major conference teams. Their best win out of conference win is Fairfield. Fairfield!!! I'm pretty sure they'd probably be under .500 in any conference this year.

I'm not sure why this is so difficult for everyone to understand. The number of bids that a conference gets is in no way a function of conference strength. The number of bids is determined by how many teams you have that are at least pretty good. The Big Ten has 1 great team, and 8 that are at least pretty good. The ACC has 5 great teams, and 6 that are at least pretty good. The fact that the Big Ten will get more bids has nothing to do with which conference is stronger overall.

Another misconception I keep hearing, regarding the Big Ten. The fact that the games are low scoring does not mean the quality of play is worse. If that were true, ACC and Big East games would be played in the 90s and 100s, while Southland and Big Sky games would be played in the 30s and 40s. Number of total points is not directly related to quality of play.

ACC and Big East fools, it's time to stop whining. It's hard to find 34 quality teams to be in the at-large pool. The only real metric down the stretch for the committee to evaluate is who hasn't lost. The Kentuckys and Arizonas with less than a .333 winning percentage over their last 7 games are clearly unworthy. So too are these middling teams in the "power conference" ACC. Hey ACC, when was the last time "the great" Duke got out of Round 2? 3 years ago? How many national titles has "the great" UNC won lately? 1, 3 years ago? The ACC isn't that different than the Big 10. A Big East argument is a little different, but both will get 7-8 teams in. In the final analysis, enough bubble teams lost down the stretch while the Big 10 teams won the big games they had to. That seems to be the only useful metric this year.

Or, alternatively, how about a compromise: no one who doesn't finish at least 5th or better in their conference should get in. Why should a #7 or 8 from ANY conference have the right to play for a national title?

Really think that Wisconsin is getting a pass for being good in past years... they did not defeat any of the big 3 in the Beg Ten and to be honest...everyone will find out how weak the Big Ten minus Mich State really is...

If the Big Ten gets 8 bid then that is sad because they really deserve 5-6... if you look inside the numbers a little more...

The Big 10 is a joke...sorry but it will all come out in the wash next Thursday and Friday...Mich State is quality and everyone else a little better than average which does not cut it in March...

I love how people consider "big wins" in Conference tourney play against the same teams that are over-rated in their own conference...not really a good way to compare resumes...resumes are built in Nov and Dec for me...

i actually think the big ten had some of the most exciting games of the season. penn state over illinois last week was a great game. teams like michigan state, ohio state, michigan, and penn state can run and play in transition when the time comes in the NCAA tourney. there is no reason to whine about the big ten. wisconsin should be 8th in the big ten, like the above person posted. they lost 6 in a row at one point. can everyone just stop complaining and enjoy the basketball?

All I see here is a bunch of jealous fans of all the other supposed BIG conferences...don't blame it on the Big Ten. It's not their faults the conference was very competitive this year. Please, stop the bitterness.

To all Big Ten haters, the comment at 4:04 is right. If you're team doesn't make the big dance, don't take it out on Michigan, Minnesota, Penn State, etc. Take it out on your own team who didn't do enough to get in.

I just want to lay it all out for you guys... There are different tiers of teams in the conferences, and the big issue between the big 10 and the ACC is that a big 10 team plays, 1 or 2 at the most teams that no questions asked are top teams in the country... These games should be written in as losses in the schedule, because a team, in order to be considered one of the top 34 teams not recieving automatic bids doesnt not need to beat top 10 teams on a consistent basis.So... i looked through the conference and tiered them up, based on what was the top tier, that should win all of there games against anyone but the same tier, and who are the lower tiers...

In the big 10, the top tier is MSU.MSU, and thats it... That means that a team that wants to be known as a top 34 team in the country has a legitimate chance to win every game in conference BUT the MSU games... That means that almost every team thats in the lower tiers, like your purdues, your illinois, your PSU, and minnesota, michigan and most of the rest of the conference should be hovering around the .500 mark, or just higher...

The top tier of the ACC is 5 teams... These are all top 10 teams that SHOULD beat any other team on any given night, and should be written into the record books as losses...UNC, Duke, Wake, Clemson, and FSU

BC played 6!!!! games agianst those teams in conference... 6!how can you possibly hope to get 9 or 10 conference wins when the top of your conference is so dominant that almost half of your conference games are such that a win by your team would be a "massive" upset? BC was 9-7 in the acc, and if you dont count the losses to those dominant, top teams was 9-4...Miami played 7 games in conference in which a loss was pre-assumed... 7 games in which they were huge underdogs, 7 games in which a win would have made huge national waves... Outside of those 7, Miami was 5-4 in the ACC

Va Tech played 8!!! games against the dominant top 5 of the conference, including 5 in a row to end the season... That means that they were heavy underdogs in 50% of their conference games... How could they possibly be expected to finish 9-7 or 8-8conference when they only played 8 games where they had a decent chance of winning?Maryland played 7 games against such competition, and the arguments are the same... In the big 10, there is only 1 top team, so every team has at least a decent shot of winning every game except for the one or 2 against MSU... in the ACC, it is far harder, and commands almost perfect play.

THAT IS WHY THE FACT THAT THE ACC IS A BETTER CONFERENCE MATTERS! WHEN YOU LOOK AT RESUMES INSTEAD OF POWER RANKINGS, THE CONFERENCE's STRENGTH MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. MIAMI, VT, and MARLYAND ALL DESERVE BIDS OVER MINNESOTA, MICHIGAN, NW, or Wisconsin.

How does a team( Penn St) with the 66th best RPI, a mediocre conference season, a 93rd ranked schedule, and no OOC to speak of merit a bid?For that matter, how is SC(49th) a top 34 team deserving of a bid, with no OOC?

I think the ACC is better than the Big 10. However, the top tier of the ACC does not include FSU and Clemson. Clemson is staring at a 7 seed right now. FSU is a 4. That would be like saying the top tier of the Big East includes West Virginia and Syracuse.

Anon @ 4:51...you made about this much sense to me...ZERO...you completely baffled and furthur complicated the situation so much to say that I read the first two paragraphs and stopped reading...DUDE, you're forgetting that as much as the supposed ACC toughness you speak of does actually exsist the BIG 10 was solid all year and actually almost won the Big 10/ACC challenge...so to say that ACC teams were more deserving of the Big Ten supposed bids is just plain foul to me...also if you switch around a couple of the matchups in the challenge Big Ten wins it this past year...Thats just the way it is...quit your whining...frankly nobody gives a crap!! Win the games and then you don't have to argue your case as hard...its really that simple!

Wow, this board has really heated up today! I could care less about the BTN, I'm just glad that my Noles didn't lose to a hot GT today. If MD wins today, they deserve to be in, that's about all I have to say. VT has a very good team, but the fact is that you've got to actually have to win close games. Their season reminds me of FSU 3 years ago when we "almost" beat a bunch of teams. Miami just plain loss, so they don't even have and argument.

"How does a team( Penn St) with the 66th best RPI, a mediocre conference season, a 93rd ranked schedule, and no OOC to speak of merit a bid?For that matter, how is SC(49th) a top 34 team deserving of a bid, with no OOC?"

They (PSU) have 5 real road wins (including 2 places where only 2 other teams have won), 6 top 50 rpi wins, and only 1 "bad" loss that was a fluke. This year, that puts you on the bubble. If they lose tonight, they will be right on the edge.

Clemson and Florida State are top tier teams, while Illinois and Purdue are just mediocre? I don't think so. That apparently means that bottom of the barrel Big Ten teams (NWU) are capable of pounding top tier ACC teams (F$U).

Konrad you are getting a little ahead of yourself with Creighton. They are certainly having a good day today with South Carolina and Virginia Tech going down. The Bluejays still need all the help they can get though and you should be a huge Dayton fan this weekend. South Carolina will likely just end up getting replaced by another SEC team and you still have to worry about Maryland in the ACC who is currently beating Wake Forest.

Virginia Tech isn't going to miss the tourney because of all their losses to UNC, Duke, and FSU. They will be missing the tournament because of losses @ Virginia, @ Georgia and neutral to Seton Hall. The Hokies had an absoluetely brutal schedule to finish the season but also had plenty of opportunities to get big wins on their home court to prove they are a tourney team. They played tough but lost games on their home floor to FSU, Duke, and UNC, and then to UNC today on a neutral floor. All we are asking is to win one of those games and they couldn't do it. All Maryland need to do was win @ Virginia and they would be in our current bracket.

"BC played 6!!!! games agianst those teams in conference... 6!how can you possibly hope to get 9 or 10 conference wins when the top of your conference is so dominant that almost half of your conference games are such that a win by your team would be a "massive" upset? BC was 9-7 in the acc, and if you dont count the losses to those dominant, top teams was 9-4..."

HUH? BC was 2-0 against UNC and Duke combined, 7-7 against everyone else in conference. Are we not going to count the wins against those said teams? What the heck?

The Wolverines should be good, but I don't know if we would go so far as to call them a lock. For good measure if I were you I would root for Purdue tonight. Like we've said all along the 8th position in the Big Ten pecking order is a precarious position. Also, it is looking like some spots are going to disappear with the results of some ongoing games.

"BC played 6!!!! games agianst those teams in conference... 6!how can you possibly hope to get 9 or 10 conference wins when the top of your conference is so dominant that almost half of your conference games are such that a win by your team would be a "massive" upset? BC was 9-7 in the acc, and if you dont count the losses to those dominant, top teams was 9-4..."

HUH? BC was 2-0 against UNC and Duke combined, 7-7 against everyone else in conference. Are we not going to count the wins against those said teams? What the heck?

If Penn State losses tonight they are the 8th team from the Big Ten. Spots 5-7 are a very tough call but right now I'd say the order is Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota. You could easily make a case to reverse that order though. All three teams will likely be seperated by no more than one seed line unless the committee needs to move one team around for some reason.

Re: Miss St. My thinking is they still have to win the tournament to get in. But what if they get to the finals and lose? That's a tough call.

Re: Penn State. Not a PSU fan, but I agree with MattLion, who I assume is. I think their entry to the tournament may be more dependent on what happens around them, than whether or not they beat Purdue tonight. I've seen PSU live and while they are pesky, they don't really have much of an ability to do anything in the tournament, in my opinion. A team like VTech would probably be more dangerous for a tourney run, but it's hard to take them over PSU since they haven't pulled any of those close contests out.

Competitively speaking, I agree with those who say the big ten's mediocrity benefits their member teams, as some teams are simply bound to put up good records. The amount of NBA talent however, is scarce in the conference(Manny Harris/maybe Sims/Mullens down the road/Turner/maybe Lucas/Morgan/Sampson III/McCamey?).

FSU was 8-1 against teams not in the top tierClemson was 8-2...Illinois was 11-5 against everyone but michigan statePurdue was 10-6, good, but hardly stellar.

All that does is completely demonstrate why the Big Ten has so much bubble talk. The ACC's mid-range is completely incapable of beating its own upper echelon. The Big Ten's mid-range can beat its own upper echelon. And thanks to Michigan and Northwestern, we know the Big Ten's mid-range can beat the ACC's upper echelon.

Does anybody hear that giant sucking sound...it's the sound of at-large bids disappearing. Maryland is in with their win and Baylor and Temple are still alive as bid stealers. Temple put itself in the at-large discussion but they will likely need to win the auto bid to get in the field.

Despite all the bad loss, Maryland has now beaten Michigan State, North Carolina, Wake Forest, and Michigan. Despite my defense of the Big Ten earlier in this thread, I think that really is more than any of Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan, Minnesota, or Penn State.

Utah State is getting worked by NMSU down 13. They can't afford a loss in the semis for sure. They will be out with a loss.

Dayton down 6 at the half. They should be safe regardless. A loss for Dayton hurts Creighton more than anyone since it is the Bluejays best win and their other good OOC wins don't look so good after this week since George Mason lost in their final and New Mexico lost yesterday. Bluejay fans need to pull very hard for Dayton or they may find their team out tomorrow. That's just how close of a call they are.

Penn State down 16!! They better make it close or they will drop to the last 4 line.

All that does is completely demonstrate why the Big Ten has so much bubble talk. The ACC's mid-range is completely incapable of beating its own upper echelon. The Big Ten's mid-range can beat its own upper echelon. And thanks to Michigan and Northwestern, we know the Big Ten's mid-range can beat the ACC's upper echelon.

And thanx to Maryland, Duke, UNC and Clemson, we know that the big 10 sucks, and is not near as good as the ACC... The Big 10 reg season champ is 0-2 against the acc, and 0 for 2 in good showings...

And thanx to Maryland, Duke, UNC and Clemson, we know that the big 10 sucks, and is not near as good as the ACC... The Big 10 reg season champ is 0-2 against the acc, and 0 for 2 in good showings...----------------

That doesn't mean ANYTHING. Minnesota beat Louisville, who is #1 in the Big East...does that mean the Big 10 is better than the Big East? You have to go on a team by team basis...the committee will.

Also, PSU is gone, I think. Big 10 will probably get 7, I hope that makes the ACC fans happy, heh.

PSU is one of the tougher cases for the committee in recent years. Insanely awful OOC schedule and a very low RPI for an at-large out of a BCS league, but, they went 4-3 against the top 3 in their league. 6 Top 50 RPI wins as well. And, depending on when you watch them, they can either pass the "look" test or fail it miserably.

What a comeback for Utah State. This will only be good for bubble teams if the Aggies win tomorrow in the finals. If they go down tomorrow then bubble teams would rather of had them lose tonight. If they had lost tonight we think they would of had little chance of an at-large. Now if they lose tomorrow to Nevada they will be in the mix.

what is the justification for Wisconsin ahead of Minnesota? Minnesota swept Wisconsin, won the same amount of games in the Big 10...and won a bigger OOC game (Louisville) I don't see Wisconsin's argument.

In an earlier post we ranked it Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Penn State and said how close it was. Penn State is clearly last on that list, but the other three you can go either way with. Michigan earns the top spot because of their OOC wins and sweep of Minnesota. Wisconsin gets the second spot because of their 10-8 conference record and 7-3 finish. Minnesota is last of those 3 because they have lost 7 out of 11.

Baylor won't affect A&M, because if the Bears win the Big XII tourney, they will be no higher than a 12 seed. The way bubble teams are losing right now and bid stealers are creeping up, the Aggies' 10 seed looks pretty safe.

The SEC just took another step closer to being a two-bid league. If Auburn can't be Tennessee tomorrow, they won't make it. If the Tigers do pull the upset, they'll in, but barely.

Penn State needs Missouri to beat Baylor in the Big XII final, Utah State to win the WAC final, and Auburn to lose tomorrow to Tennessee. If any of those things don't happen, the Nittany Lions' at-large chances will continue to diminish.

Big 10 Basketball is awful. When they go to the tourney and face offenses who CAN ACTUALLY MAKE SHOTS..They'll be thrown to the dogs easily. They won't be able to hold all the teams in the tourney to 38 and 48 points.

If Auburn had done anything OOC, they'd be solid right now. But the reality is, they didn't. Their best OOC win is at Virginia (111 RPI) and their OOC SOS is 202. To overcome that, a team needs needs to do a lot in conference play and make a deep conference tourney run. Auburn has a good but not great SEC resume (their two big conference wins in the regular season came at home), and they'll need to get to the final to get a bid.

Auburn still needs to beat Tennessee tomorrow. OOC they have nothing and they have no solid wins on the road, so a neutral court win over a tourney team will go a long way. The Tigers also need to cheer for LSU because a final loss to Miss st would be bad.

What has gotten overlooked tonight is St. Mary's win. They did what they had to do winning by 20 as Mills scored 19 on 6-14 shooting. They also got helped by SDSU winning since it makes their win over the Aztecs look better. They also have a win over Utah State without Mills that is looking better too.

Creighton suffered a brutal night. The SEC results were favorable for them, but Maryland and SDSU winning hurts. The A-10 being a three bid league now is also devastating, especially since it meant Dayton going down which was their best win.

St. Mary's is actually starting to look better than the Bluejays. It's not necessarily going to be one or the other on Sunday but it's much easier to compare the teams resumes since they are both mid-majors.

sucks being a penn state fan tonight. nobody even cares about the NIT. i love penn state bball but i do not expect them to make the ncaa tourney. it would be great if they did. it just seems like too many things have to fall in place. they had 2 chances to make it as a lock and they didn't. i hope 6 top 50 wins and 4-2 against the top 3 in the conference pull a lot of weight. B101, do you think those stats will strongly convince the committee?

Sorry FSU fans. They haven't beaten a RPI top 25 team all year. Now, that could change tomorrow. However, even with a win, there's no way they're ahead of Syracuse on the S curve. SU has 5 rpi top 25 wins with a possible #6 tomorrow. Additionally, 4 of those wins have been on road/neutral courts.

Sorry FSU fans. They haven't beaten a RPI top 25 team all year. Now, that could change tomorrow. However, even with a win, there's no way they're ahead of Syracuse on the S curve. SU has 5 rpi top 25 wins with a possible #6 tomorrow. Additionally, 4 of those wins have been on road/neutral courts.

FSU lost 2 rpi top 25 wins when clemson went from 25 to 26, and they are 5-0 against the top 50, and both teams are 10-8 against the top 100

That 4-2 record against the big three in the Big Ten is Penn State's best stat. In most years that would hold up. Heck, it held up just yesterday, but tonight was just brutal for the Nittany Lions. There is a possibility of bid-stealers galore tomorrow, which is not good news for the eighth bid out of a league.

Any teams that you thought were final four material that you are now having 2nd thoughts about? Any teams really popping up on your radar to make a run? Cuse and Gonzaga are playing the best basketball... look out.

Penn State has some nice positives..10-8 B10 regular season and plenty of good wins in conference. But it would be completely understandable if they were left out and with the way things are going no one would be able to argue to committee on the issue. All they would have to do is point to their OOC resume, #68 RPI and 5-5 finish.

We like Gonzaga to make a deep run as well. If there is one Final Four "favorite" that we are down on, it's UConn. Jerome Dyson's injury has left A.J. Price as the Huskies only outside scoring threat, and if Hasheem Thabeet gets into foul trouble in the tourney, the Huskies have no capable back-up (sorry, Gavin Edwards) to replace him. Syracuse was able to drive to the basket at will after Thabeet fouled out last night.

Seriously, FSU isn't in the discussion with Cuse anymore. Beating another top 25 RPI team in OT after last night? What more must this team do to pass the Seminoles? If 4 road/neutral court wins over top 25 RPI teams (Seminoles have 0) don't get us a 3 seed, what would it take?

And MSG is not home court for Syracuse. It's about 5 hours away from campus if you guys have never been to NY. Just to give you an idea, Nova, UConn, St Johns, Rutgers, and Providence are all closer to NY City.

Seriously, FSU isn't in the discussion with Cuse anymore. Beating another top 25 RPI team in OT after last night? What more must this team do to pass the Seminoles? If 4 road/neutral court wins over top 25 RPI teams (Seminoles have 0) don't get us a 3 seed, what would it take?

Since 25 is an arbitrary number, why dont you extend it to 26, and that gives FSU 2 instead of 0, and FSU is only 1 down in top 50 wins, and theyre tied in top 100 wins

Since 25 is an arbitrary number, why dont you extend it to 26, and that gives FSU 2 instead of 0, and FSU is only 1 down in top 50 wins, and theyre tied in top 100 wins

---

Cuse has beaten 6,8 and 9 at road/neutral sites, along with a two wins over 19 (one on a neutral site.) You really want to claim that beating 26 is even comparable to 5 superior wins, 4 away from home. Hahaha.

Bracketology 101 has been featured in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Wall Street Journal and on ESPN Radio affiliates across the country. The site is designed to serve as a more reliable, more accurate alternative to the Bracketology selections of other major sports websites.
Rather than predict teams based on the season ending today, or make wild predictions of the future, Bracketology 101 uses a unique "projection-prediction" method of selecting teams, giving fans a much more realistic idea of where their favorite teams stand in the eyes of the selection committee.
While other bracketologists favor conferences or teams or rely entirely on RPI rankings in making their picks, we factor in a team's resume as a whole - big wins, bad losses, in and out-of-conference wins, upcoming schedules, conference tournament sites, and each team's overall strengths and weaknesses compared to other teams on the bubble. Our "Field of 68" is updated every Monday throughout the season, with daily updates coming during Championship Week.

Join The B101 Team!

Do you want to advertise on Bracketology 101 during March Madness? Do you want to sponsor one of our upcoming daily brackets? E-mail us at bracketologyblog@yahoo.com for ad rates and details.

Follow B101 On Twitter

Bracketology 101 is now on Twitter! To follow B101 on Twitter, just click on the Twitter logo above.

How B101 Stacks Up

The numbers speak for themselves: Over the last five years, Bracketology 101 is the most accurate bracketology site on the Internet. We produced the best bracket in 2006, the second best in 2007 and 2008, and the fifth best in 2009. We are the only bracketologists to produce a Top 5 bracket four of the last five years. No other bracketologist has placed in the Top 5 more than twice. For a complete breakdown of our bracket stats from the last four years, click on the “We’re #1!” logo above.

The 40-60 Club

On top of correctly predicting 64 of the 65 tournament teams in 2008, Bracketology 101 also became the first bracketology site to ever seed 40 teams exactly and 60 teams within one seed line of their actual seed. Through 2010, we are the only bracketology site to earn this distinction.